@TranshumanCyborg: Communism's widely misunderstood. The problem is that after the Revolution, you have a wrecked country and every Capitalist neighbour preparing to invade. So you have to go to Martial Law and rebuild ASAP. The next step is to dissolve the government; Communism is meant to be a transitory stage. The Soviet Union got stuck; the leadership became entrenched and formed a political elite.
But yeah; I'd like to see a mix of public ownership and free trade too.
@TranshumanCyborg: S'cool; I apologise for saying you had no idea about politics. I disagree with your assessment of political ideologies, but it's clear you've thought about it. The whole point though is that ideologies are not all the same, and there is such a thing as Political Theory.
@TranshumanCyborg: "The rhetoric isn't fascist though. Its neo-liberal... the UK and US are just extensions of the old Roman power system."
The old Roman power system was Fascism; they invented it. The symbols used by America and by Nazi Germany were derived from Roman symbolism; the Romans were the First Reich, according to the Nazis. So if modern governments are extensions of the Roman system, then the EU is indeed fascist. QED.
@TranshumanCyborg: Don't be silly; if you think that then you've completely misunderstood not only the video and every single comment here posted, but also the basics of the political theories we've been discussing.
"But... I don't think the outcome is inevitable." Nothing's set in stone, it just appears to be the direction the few are maneuvering the many towards.No one can control the unfolding collective conscious entirely but it certainly can be influenced, manipulated by fear etc. to remain trapped by our 5 senses, that is "power".I'm looking into the pineal gland, the pinecone depicted in ancient traditions and highlighted by the vatican in veiled ways.There seems to definitely be something to it.
@celnuk: The impact of the pineal gland in all this would be a whole other idiom for discussing it; we'd be looking at the "above", while politics is very much of the "below", if you follow me. I'm not kicking out the metaphysical aspect; it's just a different language to discuss the same thing.
My point was that I think the actual plan of the few is doomed to failure by its very nature; whether it fails soon and suddenly, or takes a long time and dies agonizingly slowly, remains to be seen.
@JCLeSingeI realize I'm making tenuous links,having said that politics is very much a perceptual construct so I find it interesting to contemplate a perceptual shift.It seems to me a perceptual shift is what's needed and the pineal gland seems to be a component of that,fluoride anyone?Who knows what effects a higher frequency schumann resonance, solar storms, precessional alignment of sun earth and galctic centre etc.will have on consciousness.A hundreth monkey/ punctuated equilibrium shift?
@celnuk: I don't think they're tenuous links; it's just a way of looking at things that most people either wouldn't understand or see as relevant. It's nigh impossible to take a holistic perspective and study the details at the same time; "As above so below", but one's perspective is generally "Above" *or* "Below", physical or esoteric at any given time, rather than considering both together; otherwise your mind has to run on two essentially exclusive tracks.
@JCLeSinge "otherwise your mind has to run on two essentially exclusive tracks" To seek the unity beyond duality has always been the purpose of man if one is to believe in wisdom, it's commonly called enlightenment. It's very easy to get lost in details. I don't pretend to understand what's happening, particularly in every detail, but if there's to be a feasible future something has to give, obviously.
"You can never solve a problem on the level on which it was created." Einstein
communism and fascism are two left wing socialist movements, both end up with a ruling elite and a police state and both usually end up in with mass murders and eugenics, its like comparing a black gun and a silver gun - there both guns that kill people
@scottishchap2008: Mm, two misconceptions in your understanding there.
First, the Left/Right pardigm defines whether an ideology favours communal ownership (Left-Wing) vs private ownership (Right-Wing). Fascism and Capitalism are about private ownership, ergo Right-Wing. Communism and Socialism are communal ownership, Left-Wing.
I realise virtually nobody understands the Left/Right scale anymore, but it does have an actual defined meaning independent of general misconceptions.
@scottishchap2008: Your second misconception is a confusion of terms.
Communism & Socialism are political *theories*, as are Capitalism & Fascism. Totalitarianism and Democracy are political *systems*; organisational methods independent of the Left/Right paradigm. People get confused because Communism and Fascism are both Totalitarian. In Fascism, totalitarianism is the intended end-point; in Communism, it's a transitional stage towards a stateless society (e.g. Anarchism).
@JCLeSinge tell that to the cubans and the north koreans, stateless society my arse your not even aloud curtains in north korea so the state can spy on you anarchism is far right then you get small government then far left fascism or communism, the fabian socialists in my country like george bernard shaw has videos on this saying he wanted concentration camps in my country to deal with the poor/unfit and disabled,both communism and fascism should be called statism because thats were they end up
@scottishchap2008: Do you ascribe the conditions in both countries to the system of government, or to several decades of total economic blockade designed to reduce them to, well, to the state North Korea's currently in? How well would Capitalism function if all international trade was banned at gunpoint? Not well at all.
if you think anarchism is right-wing, you've been talking to too many Stateless Capitalists (lots of them on YouTube). Anarchism and Anarcho-Capitalism are not the same thing.
@scottishchap2008: And Cuba's actually doing quite well; under Capitalism, the country was just America's brothel. Now they have, among other things, better health care than the USA and career prospects for women other than "whore". All the propaganda against Cuba comes from a very small group of Cuban ex-pats who'd been making a mint out of pimping their country; the Revolution was a popular uprising of the working people, who wanted and won a living wage. Go Che Guevara.
@JCLeSinge so you support the labor camps that were set up in cuba and the mass murders without trials, u are a fascist pig if you do and i hope you end up in a socialist labor camp to clear the marxist bullshit out of your head, do you even know cuba is a police state? benicio del toro did the che film but watch the interview were the lady asked him questions about che and he cant answer any of them, hes a clueless brainwashed liberal like you
@scottishchap2008: Ad hoc ad hominem ad nonsensicum. I'm quite impressed, that's one hell of a fallacy. Your argument is simply calling me a fascist, twhich is nonsensical because you're also calling me a Marxist at the same; you're just throwing out words at random here. It's ad hoc because you're just pulling out "facts" from nowhere, rather than addressing anything I've actually said.
The only labour camps in Cuba are those illegally operated by the US army; you know, Guantanamo.
@scottishchap2008: A third, incidental, issue that tangles people up is that Hitler called the Nazis "National Socialist"; this was a ruse to draw support from the electorate on both sides; the Socialist Left- and the Nationalist Right-Wing.
So, I hope you see that the way a country is run (Totalitarian, Democratic, etc) is separate from the ideological basis; a government can be democratic, totalitarian, libertarian, etc, regardless of where it sits ideologically on the Left/Right scale.
I probably lost you a while ago but I just favourited (my channel) a movie called "Mindwalk" based on Fritjof Capras' book "The Turning Point". You may enjoy it, it's quite brilliant imo.
@celnuk: No, you haven't lost me; I've read Capra.
As I see it, the decision-point we're reaching is whether we advance forward in all senses (societally, technologically, spiritually, etc, etc), into a true "high civilisatiion" of almost limitless possibility enjoyed by all, or if we collapse into a "Neo-Dark Age" of perpetual war and techno-feudalism leading eventually to our extinction. I see a very definite "make or break" crisis approaching for us as a species.
@JCLeSinge After looking into the esoteric I believe there's an agenda at work that is hidden in plain sight as they say. When 2% of the pop. own 60%, conservatively, of all the wealth of the world....I don't believe in coincidences. The really big money has withdrawn it's chips from the common table, all the while making a killing in the casino economy with bailouts, austerity etc. I believe the bar has just been raised regarding invites to the future. Some will pass the test, most won't.
@celnuk: That's an incisive and accurate breakdown; fairly concise too. But... I don't think the outcome is inevitable.
Have you ever played "Monopoly"? It's a microcosm of how Capitalism works, from start to finish; give everyone equal funds, and watch the luckiest and most ruthless player eliminate gradually dominate the board. But what happens at the end, when one player controls all the resources? Game over. Capitalism functions by the flow of wealth; no flow, and the system crashes.
@JCLeSinge BTW, that was just the first salvo, round two is going to be truly ugly. With all western states so deeply in debt, many on the brink, when the U.S. bond market gets flushed it will be a sucking sound heard around the world. As well food is largely under control via GMO's and the world food supplies are in trouble and getting more expensive. Throw in rising energy prices etc., etc. and the bar is going to be raised pretty high before this is over. Appreciate life while you can.
I believe that the tippy-toppy of the pyramid have answered throughout history that they believe that the end does justify the means.In any case we,the profane masses,are in for a rough ride as all indications suggest.People are waking up to various aspects and to varying degrees of the nefarious dealings of those on top.The pot is simmering,soon to boil over in all manner of irrational rage I'm afraid.Time for WWIII?We're in for a very difficult "transition" I'm afraid, Realty is stranger than_
I believe what the elite of the elite are attempting to do is to shift humanity through to the next age with the hierarchical exploited model rebalanced with a more harmonious existance. A utopian global "high civilization" whereby all the most advanced knowledge expresses itself in a harmonious balance with nature. Management of the current phase has become burdensome thus "God like" decisions will have to be made, there are just too many people. Does the end justify the means?
Viewed from this perspective the story in the bible parrallels the assesment of Physicist Frijof Capra who, in his book 'The Turning Point" talks about shifting from a mechanistic Cartesian worldview to a systems view of ourselves and the world. Essentially from a human centered, functions based perceptual order to an appreciation, a love, of self as other as cosmos as they are all of one creator. "“If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear as it is - infinite” W. Blake
I watched Genesis as Ancient Cosmology - Dr John Walton on youtube the other day and it sent all the dominoes in my head falling as I re-realized that the problem is a perceptual one that goes very deep.This hierachical pyramid scheme we call civilization is based on divining nature as a functional resource to be emploted by humans.Contrast that with the message of a most unexpected messiah, Jesus, whose message could be interpreted as a call for a different perception of ourselves in the cosmos
We have fractional reserve banking failure, resource "peak", baby-boomer retirement (unpayable), 7 billion population with a theoretical doubling this century, enviromental decay/pollution etc. at the same time we are entering what is touted as an epic 11.5 yr. solar maximum, and the 26 thousand yr. precession cycle climax along with a couple other cycles converging. As above so below, microcosm, macrocosm. I believe it's harvest time as we enter the age of aquarius, global high civilization.
@celnuk: Yes, there's a link between the political cycles of boom and bust, the rise and fall of empires, and the mystical concept of "as above, so below." They're usually two disparate perspectives by which to understand events, though; most people can't grasp either one sufficiently to consider them both. Whichever one we use as our lens, we're approaching a decision point in human history that will determine the course of the 21st century and beyond.
All this as "peak oil" and other resource strain are leading us headlong into decline. We have systemic breakdown, this order is falling away and the tools for an iron fist have been put in place particularly in the U.S.A. A controlled demolition, while gaining control of everything and everyone through economics, seems to be the play. If the goal is a "high civilization" in balance with the earth the question to be raised is are there too few resources or too many people?This is a perfect storm
@celnuk: There are enough resources for everyone, even for everyone to be comfortably well-off, provided that they're equitably distributed. It's not even "the rich" who are the problem; wealth could be an attainable goal for many if it weren't for that 1% who's greed seems to know no bounds.
The (perhaps inevitable) decline is, to paraphrase Frank Zappa, causing them to remove the comfortable decor of democracy to reveal the stark cell of fascism hidden behind.
@JCLeSinge "There are enough resources for everyone" not if you want to have your cake and eat it too. If the dream is, I think it is, for humanity to elevate itself to the loftiest heights knowing will allow, to function as the highest expression possible while maintaining a balance with nature than there are too many people, way too many people. Imagine the view from the dizzying heights, trying to manage all this chaos created by half-wits it must be getting tedious from that perspective.
I should clarify, there's no ideological line to cross in the mind of money and power. What could be better than a centralised "socialized" tit to suckle? In this scenario "capitalist" also has to be put in quotes. Public/private partnership anyone? Look at the U.S.A. and China, they're both arriving at a similar form from seemingly opposite ends of the ideological spectrum yet the moneyed power operate just fine in both these days. "Competition is a sin" John D. Rockefeller
@celnuk: A "Socialized" resource means nothing if a small elite is creaming off the profit (or "suckling at the tit" as you put it); it just leads to oligarchy, which is what has formed in both China and America. A similar issue is evident in the EU; a marriage of two ideologies leading to massive state control in the interests of private wealth.
The main ideological issue is the need for a universally equitable system; Capitalism and Fascism disavow that from the outset.
@JCLeSinge "it just leads to oligarchy" I believe that's been the plan all along, the synthesis. "a marriage of two ideologies leading to massive state control in the interests of private wealth." we have lift-off! Can you imagine anything sweeter if you're in the top 1%? We are in very interesting times as the fractional reserve system has reached it's inevitable conclusion, that being an unpayable debt burden and mathmatically impossible infinate "growth" stalls, thus the looting.
@celnuk: Ah, from theoretical to practical assessments; brilliant summary there of the situation with the EU, totally accurate, or at least in total accord with how I see what's going on.
You're operating from an ideologically pure position. There's no absolute ideological line line that need be crossed for a socialist system to operate in practice while a capitalist class above it draws from the well. There's nothing stopping a centralised state from turning tax dollars into private profits, look at military expenditures as one of many examples. Collective taxes to provide a service for the popultion can be assigned in many ways, not just through state operated agencies.
@celnuk: "Operating from an ideologically pure position..." that's a high compliment; thank you.
You make a very intelligent point; I can't entirely agree, but it's the most interesting idea anyone's raised here.Yes; a Social-Democratic system can operate with a mix of Socialist and Capitalist elements. And indeed, tax can be routed through charitable NGOs to provide services. But... the use of collective military tax funds for private gain *does* cross an ideological line.
@MrMrPWN: Both and neither. It's almost certainly been covered in the comments already, but a thinktank called the Frankfurt School attempted to "marry" Communism and Fascism, the idea being that Fascism's alleged strengths could "patch" Communism's perceived weaknesses. The result was the schizophrenic ideology Communitarianism, which is more commonly known as "The Third Way", and is the ideological basis of the EU.
@zer77o: Communism and Fascism are directly opposed; Fascism is an ideology based upon total loyalty to the leader and the nation (e.g. charisma + racism), while Communism is predicated on the needs of the many outweighing the greed of the few. The confusion arises from Hitler's appropriation of the term "socialist" and the totalitarian nature of both systems. They are NOT the same, whatever propaganda you might have been reading.
The EU is a Catholic project... um, proof? Evidence? Anything?
@zer77o: Oh, I'm well aware of the fascist roots of the EU; that's what the video is about, after all. And it's pretty much common knowledge that Ratzinger is a Nazi and so on.
But it's one thing to call the Catholic church and the EU fascist organisations, and quite another to equate them as one entity; linked, certainly, but the point I questioned was the description of the EU as a *Catholic* plot. See the distinction?
@zer77o: Re Catholicism being Fascistic... I'm still far from convinced that the EU is a Catholic project, but historically, Catholicism and Fascism *do* owe their origins to the same source; the Roman Empire.
That's incidentally more evidence that the Nazis weren't Socialists by any stretch; according to their own beliefs, the Nazis were the Third Reich, Weimar Germany was the Second Reich, the Roman Empire was the First Reich.
@pogmotho1n: No it's not. Socialism is non-revolutionary Communism. Socialism seeks to reform the existing system into a more equitable format; Communism seeks to smash the existing system and replace it outright. This presupposes a situation equivalent to martial law while the country's infrastructure is rebuilt following the revolution; temporary totalitarianism by necessity, as opposed to Fascism, which sees totalitarianism as the desired end result.
I think that "An Inconvenient Truth" and the Holocaust have one thing in common, in that they both reveal something so horrible that people shy away from accepting it.
That's not to say Al Gore's film presents the case accurately; he's probably done more harm than good to Environmentalism. The whole "Carbon Footprint" thing is baloney, but the reality of pollution and environmental damage should be evident by common sense.
Evidently, the Nazis didn't mention the Final Solution in their coded messages; why would they? The Enigma code was for military information, the Holocaust was internal, orchestrated by letters and telephone. Plus, it was being kept secret from the German people themselves; even those who suspected would not have known for sure, and most would have been too afraid to admit their thoughts. Read "Fatherland" by Robert Harris; fascinating novel.
@trwsandford: Fascism is not a form of Socialism. The Nazi's styled themselves 'National Socialist' to attract the support both Left- and Right-Wing Germans. Nazi's is a form of Fascism; Socialism is at the opposite end of the Political scale.
Marx and Engles being German no more makes then Nazi's than it does make make socialism Fascist; they are not the same thing.
@Lenangreal immigrants ARE citizens once they arrive in your country dipshit, if they're smarter than you they deserve YOUR job, if you don't like it suck it up and learn in school.
@Lenangreal we already have you inbred twat. That's why you morons could develop, because we fought the turks for over 4 centuries. Oh wait i forgot ...history is not your strong point.
@cr4yv3n i do not speak for my retarded government. if you dont know the difference, thas your problem. i suppose most romanians dont like the idea of being invaded like most italians do. do romanians like gipsies?
@Lenangreal "Do romanians like gipsies?" is a difficult question.
It may mean : do you enjoy the company of gipsies who are ugly, dirty , smell and their behavior is less than civilized? In that case: No i don't.
But guess what my former french teacher back when i was 7 was a gipsy, he had left from home and worked part-time for the local store to pay for his education and now he was happily married, with a daughter, a house and a well respected job.
@cr4yv3n well thats a good point. like you, i preferd civilized people than savages. i have nothing against romanians. Ive got a romanian hard working family as neighbour, and i had a romanian girlfriend. unfortunately as you know, many romanians come in italy to steal and eventually, rape. Well, i really hate those people but i dont hate all romanians, certainly not. I know theyre a minority.
I would like romania to join schengen but other europeans countries put a veto.
@Lenangreal I'd like our country to stay out of schengen - at least until this minority of troublemakers gets smaller. I'm getting tired of having to explain we don't eat swans for breakfast :S
Some romanians are not yet ready for the world outside their borders.
@cr4yv3n is that a good choice? maybe. maybe it prevented thousands of gipsies to flee into western europe. and i bet theyre not so civilized like your teacher.
i dont want them, neither i want refugees. and guess what, switzerland and austria think the same
What you saw in Italy were the leeches that came begging and stealing not those who wanted to "work" and "live" there - and ofc you formed a ( negative ) opinnion of them.
However their ethnic background is irrelevant, here in Belgium ( where i live now ) i have met plenty of muslims and at first was paranoid : "omg terrorists !!!" due to media branwashing but they are quite nice folk and quite civilized.
Some are even my neighbours - some are friendlier than my own countrymen ! :P
Bottm line is you cannot change the system - So utilise it to your advantage we have short life spans so be happy with your family and friends. Enjoy life
What was before The System, and what will be after it? Life is change.
But you're half right; you cannot change the system, I cannot change the systems... but WE (that is, the people) can change it. Its the workers who actually run the system, who feed, maintain and police it, the workers who are oppressed by it, and the workers who believe "There's no changing it." Who tells us so? The people who own the system; the Rich tell us there's no changing it, but then, its them who profit off it.
You know I was talking to a lot of people friends from different faiths ..I was quite intrigued by one friend of mine who happened to be Muslim he was talking about the disease of Capitalism and how they abhor anything to do with *interest money transactions*..and how it's categorically forbidden for them to deal in interest at any cost..At first I couldnt see where he was coming from but now if you look around the whole world is controlled through interest rates.
Right; money is no longer based on wealth, but on debt. The economy now runs on debt; the "incentive to work" that someone else mentioned in a comment is no longer self-betterment, but simply servicing debts. The destination of society, if we keep going this way, is techno-feudalism; the net value of anyone's wage will be zero and the term "wage-slave" literally true. Where debt = wealth, you own nothing; its all on lease from the bank.
@VeerGill Infiltrating sex into the "system" ie schools, tv guarantees submission and dumbing down of herd, In a Democracy control is taken by lies & propaganda.
@SDSen: Interesting response... yes, all that happens, but it's primarily because "sex sells"; there's big money in sex, but the eventual knock-on effect is of a sexualised but desensitized society. You've also got to consider the impact of war on human sexuality; the current sexual behavior in Western society is uncannily similar to sexual behavior in time of war, but we're not facing the wartime reduction of the male population.
@VeerGill: Well, the absolutist answer from either hand is a bad answer. Banning sex education only promotes VD and unwanted pregnancy, and encourages folk to get their sex-ed from porn, but teaching kids about sex younger and younger only prompts them to try it sooner, which has exactly the same results as banning sex-ed outright. 14 year-olds need sex-ed; 7 year-olds don't.
@JCLeSinge@JCLeSinge ..I don't think unwanted pregnancy would somehow decline if it's taught in schools! ..I feel myself this whole sex thing is a way to corrupt and fill the young human brain with sleaze in the name of 'education'After watching a program about the type of sex education being taught inschools to 14-15 yr olds.My parents great grandparents and their cousins etc didnt need to be educated about these things and i'm sure neither did urs.These things are inbuilt and come naturally.
@VeerGill: Depends on your general view of sex; it's not inherently sleazy, and the perception that it is just encourages people to emulate porn in their sex-lives (IMFAO).
Again, the absolutist thing; teaching sex-ed to teenagers won't increase underage pregnancy, quite the opposite, but teaching it to little kids, e.g. 7-12 year-olds, will; informing them about sex will only encourage them to start way too early, before they can understand contraception or why it's necessary.
It ignores the human element and by it's very nature of putting a tremendous amount of power in a few hands is terrible and corrupt, history has shown this over and over again-Cultural Revolution in China, Stalin Purges, Pol Pot, etc..etc..
Capitalism does have it's problems but it also encourages discoveries & advances
Capitalism's problems include a perpetual addiction to war, wholesale destruction of the environment and gross exploitation of every working person alive... AND it focuses massive power in the hands of an elite few. You don't think you live in a democracy do you? Really?! Voting in your leaders isn't democracy; its "elective dictatorship"; we choose our dictators in a rigged popularity contest. Democracy would be where our "leaders" understood that they exist to serve us, the people.
Whereas I think inheritance taxes should be eliminated completely, I would say that the 'wealthy' should pay for their share of consumption via VAT/Sales tax. I don't believe they do currently. Generally wage earners foot a disproportionate amount of the bill for funding the infrastructure and social services
Question for you! How does a tax on corporate income have anything to do with what an individual pays in taxes?
regardless of what corporate tax rates are, because they (the rich) take full advantage of paying themselves in ways only subject to capital gains tax and not payroll tax, which is significantly higher.
VeerGill - That is exactly why capital gains is taxed lower than income tax. A corporation is not some anonymous, faceless entity but simply an accounting quirk. Because the ownership structure of a business is a Corporation and not a partnership/MLP changes nothing. The argument that corporations are not humans is old and has roots in the British common law, but monetarily they are the same and ought to be treated the same. Don't punish the productive and reward the unproductive
The intention of the lowered capital gains tax is/was to encourage corporations to reinvest in their operations (technology,salaried staff,etc.), not to be redistributed to their owners/shareholders for personal gain.
Not true, capital gains and qualified dividend taxes were lowered because of double taxation. Just so you know, there was never a tax on re-invested dividends, so the cut was never really to encourage re-investment. Just a ploy by the supply siders to push their own agenda. If the government wished to increase reinvestment then they should cut the corporate tax rates.
I've been told that in Monaco they have no individual taxation, only corporate; people pay tax on their profits, but not on their earnings. The country has the lowest poverty rates, a good lifestyle available to the vast majority, and some of the highest private investment in the world.
I don't believe in Slavery sure but today the woman is making her body a property which somebody has to pay for like a commodity and this could never happen were there not stupid so called feminists since 1968.
This is true; women are being encouraged to treat their bodies like a commodity... but that too is a form of slavery, and far divorced from any real notion of gender equality. The basic principle that men and women are legally, intellectually and morally equal is a tenet of Communist ideology; its not irrational. Extremist feminism and capitalist "girl power" are destructive within society; the notion that women have rights is rational and moral.
I think it is coming from Jewish Zionists and not even from Communists. See Israel inside were Woman has a long tradition to rule the man which I strongly reject. Because all this nonsense is based on disrespect of biological needs of man versus woman. However did you know that the Central Banking System which is cause of all fascistic problems today was first introduced as an idea at the Communistic Manifest? Watch the Movie "The Obama Deception", and "Endgame", I am back to you then.
In this regard I would like to bring to your attention the
Film: "Firewall - In defense of the Nation State" which you can easily find on Google Video. Mind that the aim is to sink the living standard and divide the society. Mr. Rockefeller onces said that he was for Feminism because he likes Woman to work because by then their is more Taxpayers working for him which is what he celebrates.
If I am right you mean that the so thought slavery you mean is because of Economic Pressure which you insist forces woman into prostitution? But myself I think you must see the real cause of all this problems. Woman in todays World are forced to be chained at their working places instead of being allowed to become a happy mother having a man who brings money home for family and you must question the system which does not allow man to feed their families with one income....
Some part of these above explanations are an abstract from a conversion I had in the past with a well informed source within the United States which helped me a lot to clear my knowledge.
It has been the custom of Britain, since the beginning of the
Eighteenth Century's so-called "Seven Years War," to play
Russian governments successfully, most of the time, except when wiser heads in Russia were allied with the U.S.A., to contribute to London's success in inducting the leading nations of continental Europe to destroy one another all for the greater glory of the Anglo-Dutch descendants of the empiricist system of empire launched by the influence of Paolo Sarpi.
Both believe in an Empire and both believe in force. Both deny the importance of a Nation State. Both incline to forced collectivization. Both deny personal freedom. Both believe in the bad of human character.
Max Horkheimer and Hanna Arendt were Jews by origin but Nazi by inclination. I believe Nazi-Communism is lead by Jews designed in order to create a Strategy of Tensions which is Made in London in order to ruin Europe-Russia real developments as they ever did.
The EU is both, an amalgamated version of Nazi-Communism whereabout both negative elements have merged. High Financial Circles have done business with both in history: With the Communists and with the Nazis. They both like fascism and hate a free society.
Communism or fascism.
In the sense that both Marxism and fascism are by-products
of the doctrines attributed by the British to Adam Smith,
both are, like the British system itself, products of British
"The EU is both, an amalgamated version of Nazi-Communism whereabout both negative elements have merged."
That far in, yes, you're absolutely right; that's the influence of the Frankfurt School, tyring to amalgamate Communism and Fascism.
But the conclusion that the two are therefore the same... no, Communism and Fascism are inimical opposites. To attribute it all to British perspectives and influence also is to dismiss 90% of the history and information available.
Thank you; nice to get a comment from someone who knows what they're talking about. As yet, I can't say I've heard an intelligent argument as to why the EU could be considered Communist. I've heard some good ones as to why 'Totalitarian' is more applicable than 'Nazi'. I've also had quite a lot of verbal (see the board), and been called a Nazi more than once, ironically by at least one bona-fide Holocaust denier.
In a word, no. Thanks again; people get so worked up over Stalin that they forget about the ideas and the millions of people who fought for them. Notions like racial and sexual equality, a classless society, the elimination of poverty, an end to war. All that hippy stuff that's in no way profitable.
I mean that inequality, war and poverty are the cornerstones of the Capitalist system and that its supporters will fight to the death and beyond to defend the principles of greed and exploitation that prevent the emergence of a fully-functional and sane society.
The ONLY reason Communism gets a bad press is that it espouses a basic principle of disenfranchising of the rich. That means taking away the vast fortunes of the multi-millionaires and their obscene lifestyles. That doesn't mean taking cars, Coca-Cola and TVs away from ordinary people; it means liberating all that excess wealth from the hands of the very few for distribution to the many. Communism is the fight of Poor vs Rich, and the rich (owning the media) have cast the Poor as the bad guy.
The rich exist only by exploitation. The wealth and resources needed to relieve poverty have to come from somewhere; Communism proposes that we take those resources from the top 10% of the rich, who stole it from the poor anyway through exploitation. Think of a one-class society, with a middle-class lifestyle for all founded on working-class values. The only way you can have that is to remove the rich upper class who currently and historically exploit the collective wealth and resources.
Too simplistic; there is no motive within Capitalism for charitable action. Even modern charities have to function as businesses, turning a profit by exploiting the situation; look at Oxfam.
Also, I'm not talking about the 'moderately rich' here, the upper-middle classes; I'm talking about the Rich, the people who own helicopters and private jets. Them. they hog 90% of the world's assets and they are a CLASS of people, not a handful of individual oligarchs.
Hell yeah; by the standard I'm talking, Bruce Willis and all his Hollywood pals would have nothing to fear; the kind of people I'm talking about run companies with a GDP exceeding that of European nations; Lord Sainsbury or Mr Walmart, for example. These people, considered against their wealth, are superfluous, and there are too many of 'em. Any international crisis you can name (environment, economy, etc) could be solved by liberating the resources of a handful of the Super-Rich.
It strikes me that you're better informed about Communism than many, but still a bit naive about the nature of capitalism, if you'll forgive me for saying so.
I didn't say you liked Capitalism; just that the full depths and implications of its ideology might in some regard have passed you by. Just that you said it needn't be exploitative or that the rich might willingly give up their wealth; Naivity in so far as wishful thinking.
Insulting me does nothing to bolster your argument. Go on then; name me one rich man who can be demonstrated as a true philanthropist. To fit your definition, he would have to have never employed anyone else (exploitation of others), never made any investments (exploitation by usury) and never sold his own labour for a wage (exploitation of self). The insidious nature of Capitalism means that people these days don't grasp the extent of the exploitation going on, or indeed what the word means.
The lottery is funded by exploiting the poor with the belief that they can win big; half the money goes into the pot, the other half goes into the lottery operator's pocket; so he gets half a dozen jackpots every week. Exploitation, again, this time based on the simple principle that its easier to scam one million poor people out of $1 that it is to scam $1,000,000 out of one rich man. Lotteries benefit no one except those already rich.
The point is not that there are rich folkwho donate to charity (even allowing for some genuine philanthropy, the main motive is that wealth is ill-gotten and they must be SEEN to give something back to the people they exploited to become rich).
The point is that there is no rich man under capitalism who did not exploit others to gain his wealth... unless you can prove otherwise by giving me a NAME.
Non-sequiter, friend; "It does not follow..." that being 'undeveloped' (after over 30yrs development to reach this point), prevents us from observing the ideology at play. Do people not know what 'ideology' means? The ideology of the EU is Neo-Liberal; I raise the question whether its origins are Communist or Fascist since people have been comparing the EU to the USSR and bleating about Communism.
Most 'common men' won't remember Communism in the ideological way you're alluding to, they will remember it historically.Most 'common men' have only one ideal and that's freedom. Ipso-facto.
No, most common men have only ideal and that's slavery. Think about it; we're spoon-fed conformity from the moment we're born. The purpose of school is not education but training; you learn nothing useful except how to sit patiently at a desk doing pointless paperwork. Guess what adult life is about? To be successful is to be a good drone; wage slavery, from cradle to grave, so endemic now that I doubt either you or I could define what 'Freedom' actually means.
"Being Free from Debt" isn't freedom; that's the first definition I thought of, and it just underlines the nature of the problem: we relate 'Free' to a monetary value, to ownership, immediately, because under Capitalism something is 'Free' is it has yet to be bought or stolen and put under ownership. That's not Freedom, that's Communitarianism at work, juxtaposing concepts and lies as strategy without morality, disarming us of the vocabulary to even think freely.
No, we may be born into slavery, but it's not our ideology. Freedom to most means being self-sufficient in the vital commodoties needed to sustain life.
Something we've never known and would probably be utterly terrifying; what you're envisaging is some kind of impossible Anarcho-Capitalist utopia, which is pretty much what we're heading for. The other option is an enforced return to rural homesteading, which was how Pol Pot got so infamous; doesn't work.
What you're saying about Communism, that the ideology was designed with a covert purpose, is far more true of Neo-Liberalism and Capitalism.
I mean 'the other option' within the definition of freedom you gave, not that the only way to save society is to march a few million people to death, just to be clear.
My tip is don't believe history as it is in general education, history is given to us by those that rule and enslave. Here's a good book-list : Tragedy and Hope-Carrol Quigley, The Anglo American Establishment-Carrol Quigley, The Cultural Cold war-Frances Saunders, Between Two Ages-Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Hideden Persuaders-Vance Packard, The Scientific Outlook-Bertrand Russel, The Next Million Years-Charles Galton Darwin, The History Of The World part 1&2-H.G Wells (non-fiction)
"My tip is don't believe history as it is in general education, history is given to us by those that rule and enslave."
Good advice.
My information on this particular subject does not come from those sources; I've had access to primary historical references (original WWII photos and correspondence) and a library of rare political books.
Did you know that in 1953 Senator Norman Dodd headed the Reece investigatory commission, and it found that the Tax-exempt foundations(Ford, Rockefeller,Carnegie, Rhodes), were funding and propping up the Communist regime. With the eventual aim of joining the two. Most of their grain was imported from the US and Canada. The Soviets were broke, but the west needed the cold-war, because wars give governments purpose and control. It's also why they destroyed McCarthey in the media, he was closing in
I was right with you there until you tried to rehab McCarthy. sorry, can't be done'; the man led a witch-hunt, there's no it around to say he was the victim. I oculd make a good case to rehab Benedict Arnold, but no one would listen.
I'm not trying to rehab McCarthy and agree, that he led a witch-hunt, but why do you think that would bother the corrupt US government. It didn't bother them at all. The reason the media and Hollywood brought him down was because some very big powers were getting twitchy.
The point you seem to miss, is that Communism was a big experiment and the idea, was to eventually merge it with the west. The communist manifesto was wtitten in London when Marx was in protection.Gorbachev moved to america heads a green movement and wins nobel peace prize. After the fall of the USSR, Gorbachev said to the Eastern bloc leaders, 'you will here it is the end of communism, but don't worry it's just evolving to the next stage. From an interview in the Toronto Star.
You're very well informed, but unfortunately you lack a real understanding of what Communism is about. That's not surprising; very few people understand it. All the stuff you're raising is window-dressing, superfluous to the real ideological issues.
Words like superfluous and ideological, don't really portray your understanding of communism. Summary of ideology (for this little comment box). FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITIES, TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS{socialism}. FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITY, TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS NEEDS {communism}
Lol. Socialism leads to Communism, and then on to Anarchy. By which I mean a 'stateless-state' wherein there is no role for government. You might say that the most important job of a Communist Dictator is to resign. That's the aim of Communism, which tallies exactly with the ideals of the US Founding Fathers; George Washington spoke at length on the need to educate and better every citizen until government was redundant.
I still think that you miss the fact that all the ideologies we're debating we're in fact facades. They were written by a powerful minority promising nirvana and utopia on earth but with a very different agenda in mind. They were, and are true-believers in the Hegelian-dialect...you have a thesis and an antithesis and then present the solution to the problem. Divide and conquer. Conflict creates change.
What you're talking about here is Communitarianism, which is a neo-liberal bastardization of multiple ideologies. 99% of people have never heard of it, but it is the dominant ideology of the modern era. Among the basic principles of Communitarianism AKA 'The Third Way' is the notion that all ideology is false, everyone is corrupt, and that contradictory morals and beliefs can be entertained together.
Good stuff; most people have never heard of it, despite it being the ideology of Blair, Brown, Thatcher and Reagan, besides having infiltrated medicine, social services, and policing long before 'Common Purpose' appeared. The EU is Communitarian, which is a Neo-Liberal ideology. There are historical links to Left Wing theory through the Frankfurt School, but Neo-Liberalism and Communism are poles apart. Unfortunately, we've all been raised on Neo-Liberalism, e.g. Raised on Communitarian lies.
The 'point' you think I'm missing is that we've been taught to think that no one really believes in their ideals. That's deeply disingenuous to the millions of Communists and Socialists who fought and died for their cause; corruption of the leadership does nothing to detract from the ideals and zeal of the grass-roots reformers and revolutionaries who were the core of Communism and represent what the movement was really about; the rights of the common man.
Ue is communist. Social-democratic in fact, but history shows that social democracy turns sooner or later in communism
ThePowersP1 1 month ago
@TranshumanCyborg: Communism's widely misunderstood. The problem is that after the Revolution, you have a wrecked country and every Capitalist neighbour preparing to invade. So you have to go to Martial Law and rebuild ASAP. The next step is to dissolve the government; Communism is meant to be a transitory stage. The Soviet Union got stuck; the leadership became entrenched and formed a political elite.
But yeah; I'd like to see a mix of public ownership and free trade too.
JCLeSinge 10 months ago
@TranshumanCyborg: S'cool; I apologise for saying you had no idea about politics. I disagree with your assessment of political ideologies, but it's clear you've thought about it. The whole point though is that ideologies are not all the same, and there is such a thing as Political Theory.
JCLeSinge 10 months ago
@TranshumanCyborg: "The rhetoric isn't fascist though. Its neo-liberal... the UK and US are just extensions of the old Roman power system."
The old Roman power system was Fascism; they invented it. The symbols used by America and by Nazi Germany were derived from Roman symbolism; the Romans were the First Reich, according to the Nazis. So if modern governments are extensions of the Roman system, then the EU is indeed fascist. QED.
JCLeSinge 10 months ago
@TranshumanCyborg: Don't be silly; if you think that then you've completely misunderstood not only the video and every single comment here posted, but also the basics of the political theories we've been discussing.
JCLeSinge 10 months ago
peter joseph merola does not dislike the kkk
brahmbhattbhavna 11 months ago
"But... I don't think the outcome is inevitable." Nothing's set in stone, it just appears to be the direction the few are maneuvering the many towards.No one can control the unfolding collective conscious entirely but it certainly can be influenced, manipulated by fear etc. to remain trapped by our 5 senses, that is "power".I'm looking into the pineal gland, the pinecone depicted in ancient traditions and highlighted by the vatican in veiled ways.There seems to definitely be something to it.
celnuk 1 year ago
@celnuk: The impact of the pineal gland in all this would be a whole other idiom for discussing it; we'd be looking at the "above", while politics is very much of the "below", if you follow me. I'm not kicking out the metaphysical aspect; it's just a different language to discuss the same thing.
My point was that I think the actual plan of the few is doomed to failure by its very nature; whether it fails soon and suddenly, or takes a long time and dies agonizingly slowly, remains to be seen.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSingeI realize I'm making tenuous links,having said that politics is very much a perceptual construct so I find it interesting to contemplate a perceptual shift.It seems to me a perceptual shift is what's needed and the pineal gland seems to be a component of that,fluoride anyone?Who knows what effects a higher frequency schumann resonance, solar storms, precessional alignment of sun earth and galctic centre etc.will have on consciousness.A hundreth monkey/ punctuated equilibrium shift?
celnuk 1 year ago
@celnuk: I don't think they're tenuous links; it's just a way of looking at things that most people either wouldn't understand or see as relevant. It's nigh impossible to take a holistic perspective and study the details at the same time; "As above so below", but one's perspective is generally "Above" *or* "Below", physical or esoteric at any given time, rather than considering both together; otherwise your mind has to run on two essentially exclusive tracks.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge "otherwise your mind has to run on two essentially exclusive tracks" To seek the unity beyond duality has always been the purpose of man if one is to believe in wisdom, it's commonly called enlightenment. It's very easy to get lost in details. I don't pretend to understand what's happening, particularly in every detail, but if there's to be a feasible future something has to give, obviously.
"You can never solve a problem on the level on which it was created." Einstein
celnuk 1 year ago
communism and fascism are two left wing socialist movements, both end up with a ruling elite and a police state and both usually end up in with mass murders and eugenics, its like comparing a black gun and a silver gun - there both guns that kill people
scottishchap2008 1 year ago
@scottishchap2008: Mm, two misconceptions in your understanding there.
First, the Left/Right pardigm defines whether an ideology favours communal ownership (Left-Wing) vs private ownership (Right-Wing). Fascism and Capitalism are about private ownership, ergo Right-Wing. Communism and Socialism are communal ownership, Left-Wing.
I realise virtually nobody understands the Left/Right scale anymore, but it does have an actual defined meaning independent of general misconceptions.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@scottishchap2008: Your second misconception is a confusion of terms.
Communism & Socialism are political *theories*, as are Capitalism & Fascism. Totalitarianism and Democracy are political *systems*; organisational methods independent of the Left/Right paradigm. People get confused because Communism and Fascism are both Totalitarian. In Fascism, totalitarianism is the intended end-point; in Communism, it's a transitional stage towards a stateless society (e.g. Anarchism).
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge tell that to the cubans and the north koreans, stateless society my arse your not even aloud curtains in north korea so the state can spy on you anarchism is far right then you get small government then far left fascism or communism, the fabian socialists in my country like george bernard shaw has videos on this saying he wanted concentration camps in my country to deal with the poor/unfit and disabled,both communism and fascism should be called statism because thats were they end up
scottishchap2008 10 months ago
@scottishchap2008: Do you ascribe the conditions in both countries to the system of government, or to several decades of total economic blockade designed to reduce them to, well, to the state North Korea's currently in? How well would Capitalism function if all international trade was banned at gunpoint? Not well at all.
if you think anarchism is right-wing, you've been talking to too many Stateless Capitalists (lots of them on YouTube). Anarchism and Anarcho-Capitalism are not the same thing.
JCLeSinge 10 months ago
@scottishchap2008: And Cuba's actually doing quite well; under Capitalism, the country was just America's brothel. Now they have, among other things, better health care than the USA and career prospects for women other than "whore". All the propaganda against Cuba comes from a very small group of Cuban ex-pats who'd been making a mint out of pimping their country; the Revolution was a popular uprising of the working people, who wanted and won a living wage. Go Che Guevara.
JCLeSinge 10 months ago
@JCLeSinge so you support the labor camps that were set up in cuba and the mass murders without trials, u are a fascist pig if you do and i hope you end up in a socialist labor camp to clear the marxist bullshit out of your head, do you even know cuba is a police state? benicio del toro did the che film but watch the interview were the lady asked him questions about che and he cant answer any of them, hes a clueless brainwashed liberal like you
scottishchap2008 10 months ago
@scottishchap2008: Ad hoc ad hominem ad nonsensicum. I'm quite impressed, that's one hell of a fallacy. Your argument is simply calling me a fascist, twhich is nonsensical because you're also calling me a Marxist at the same; you're just throwing out words at random here. It's ad hoc because you're just pulling out "facts" from nowhere, rather than addressing anything I've actually said.
The only labour camps in Cuba are those illegally operated by the US army; you know, Guantanamo.
JCLeSinge 10 months ago
@scottishchap2008: A third, incidental, issue that tangles people up is that Hitler called the Nazis "National Socialist"; this was a ruse to draw support from the electorate on both sides; the Socialist Left- and the Nationalist Right-Wing.
So, I hope you see that the way a country is run (Totalitarian, Democratic, etc) is separate from the ideological basis; a government can be democratic, totalitarian, libertarian, etc, regardless of where it sits ideologically on the Left/Right scale.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
I probably lost you a while ago but I just favourited (my channel) a movie called "Mindwalk" based on Fritjof Capras' book "The Turning Point". You may enjoy it, it's quite brilliant imo.
celnuk 1 year ago
@celnuk: No, you haven't lost me; I've read Capra.
As I see it, the decision-point we're reaching is whether we advance forward in all senses (societally, technologically, spiritually, etc, etc), into a true "high civilisatiion" of almost limitless possibility enjoyed by all, or if we collapse into a "Neo-Dark Age" of perpetual war and techno-feudalism leading eventually to our extinction. I see a very definite "make or break" crisis approaching for us as a species.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge After looking into the esoteric I believe there's an agenda at work that is hidden in plain sight as they say. When 2% of the pop. own 60%, conservatively, of all the wealth of the world....I don't believe in coincidences. The really big money has withdrawn it's chips from the common table, all the while making a killing in the casino economy with bailouts, austerity etc. I believe the bar has just been raised regarding invites to the future. Some will pass the test, most won't.
celnuk 1 year ago
@celnuk: That's an incisive and accurate breakdown; fairly concise too. But... I don't think the outcome is inevitable.
Have you ever played "Monopoly"? It's a microcosm of how Capitalism works, from start to finish; give everyone equal funds, and watch the luckiest and most ruthless player eliminate gradually dominate the board. But what happens at the end, when one player controls all the resources? Game over. Capitalism functions by the flow of wealth; no flow, and the system crashes.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge BTW, that was just the first salvo, round two is going to be truly ugly. With all western states so deeply in debt, many on the brink, when the U.S. bond market gets flushed it will be a sucking sound heard around the world. As well food is largely under control via GMO's and the world food supplies are in trouble and getting more expensive. Throw in rising energy prices etc., etc. and the bar is going to be raised pretty high before this is over. Appreciate life while you can.
celnuk 1 year ago
I believe that the tippy-toppy of the pyramid have answered throughout history that they believe that the end does justify the means.In any case we,the profane masses,are in for a rough ride as all indications suggest.People are waking up to various aspects and to varying degrees of the nefarious dealings of those on top.The pot is simmering,soon to boil over in all manner of irrational rage I'm afraid.Time for WWIII?We're in for a very difficult "transition" I'm afraid, Realty is stranger than_
celnuk 1 year ago
I believe what the elite of the elite are attempting to do is to shift humanity through to the next age with the hierarchical exploited model rebalanced with a more harmonious existance. A utopian global "high civilization" whereby all the most advanced knowledge expresses itself in a harmonious balance with nature. Management of the current phase has become burdensome thus "God like" decisions will have to be made, there are just too many people. Does the end justify the means?
celnuk 1 year ago
Viewed from this perspective the story in the bible parrallels the assesment of Physicist Frijof Capra who, in his book 'The Turning Point" talks about shifting from a mechanistic Cartesian worldview to a systems view of ourselves and the world. Essentially from a human centered, functions based perceptual order to an appreciation, a love, of self as other as cosmos as they are all of one creator. "“If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear as it is - infinite” W. Blake
celnuk 1 year ago
I watched Genesis as Ancient Cosmology - Dr John Walton on youtube the other day and it sent all the dominoes in my head falling as I re-realized that the problem is a perceptual one that goes very deep.This hierachical pyramid scheme we call civilization is based on divining nature as a functional resource to be emploted by humans.Contrast that with the message of a most unexpected messiah, Jesus, whose message could be interpreted as a call for a different perception of ourselves in the cosmos
celnuk 1 year ago
We have fractional reserve banking failure, resource "peak", baby-boomer retirement (unpayable), 7 billion population with a theoretical doubling this century, enviromental decay/pollution etc. at the same time we are entering what is touted as an epic 11.5 yr. solar maximum, and the 26 thousand yr. precession cycle climax along with a couple other cycles converging. As above so below, microcosm, macrocosm. I believe it's harvest time as we enter the age of aquarius, global high civilization.
celnuk 1 year ago
@celnuk: Yes, there's a link between the political cycles of boom and bust, the rise and fall of empires, and the mystical concept of "as above, so below." They're usually two disparate perspectives by which to understand events, though; most people can't grasp either one sufficiently to consider them both. Whichever one we use as our lens, we're approaching a decision point in human history that will determine the course of the 21st century and beyond.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
All this as "peak oil" and other resource strain are leading us headlong into decline. We have systemic breakdown, this order is falling away and the tools for an iron fist have been put in place particularly in the U.S.A. A controlled demolition, while gaining control of everything and everyone through economics, seems to be the play. If the goal is a "high civilization" in balance with the earth the question to be raised is are there too few resources or too many people?This is a perfect storm
celnuk 1 year ago
@celnuk: There are enough resources for everyone, even for everyone to be comfortably well-off, provided that they're equitably distributed. It's not even "the rich" who are the problem; wealth could be an attainable goal for many if it weren't for that 1% who's greed seems to know no bounds.
The (perhaps inevitable) decline is, to paraphrase Frank Zappa, causing them to remove the comfortable decor of democracy to reveal the stark cell of fascism hidden behind.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge "There are enough resources for everyone" not if you want to have your cake and eat it too. If the dream is, I think it is, for humanity to elevate itself to the loftiest heights knowing will allow, to function as the highest expression possible while maintaining a balance with nature than there are too many people, way too many people. Imagine the view from the dizzying heights, trying to manage all this chaos created by half-wits it must be getting tedious from that perspective.
celnuk 1 year ago
I should clarify, there's no ideological line to cross in the mind of money and power. What could be better than a centralised "socialized" tit to suckle? In this scenario "capitalist" also has to be put in quotes. Public/private partnership anyone? Look at the U.S.A. and China, they're both arriving at a similar form from seemingly opposite ends of the ideological spectrum yet the moneyed power operate just fine in both these days. "Competition is a sin" John D. Rockefeller
celnuk 1 year ago
@celnuk: A "Socialized" resource means nothing if a small elite is creaming off the profit (or "suckling at the tit" as you put it); it just leads to oligarchy, which is what has formed in both China and America. A similar issue is evident in the EU; a marriage of two ideologies leading to massive state control in the interests of private wealth.
The main ideological issue is the need for a universally equitable system; Capitalism and Fascism disavow that from the outset.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge "it just leads to oligarchy" I believe that's been the plan all along, the synthesis. "a marriage of two ideologies leading to massive state control in the interests of private wealth." we have lift-off! Can you imagine anything sweeter if you're in the top 1%? We are in very interesting times as the fractional reserve system has reached it's inevitable conclusion, that being an unpayable debt burden and mathmatically impossible infinate "growth" stalls, thus the looting.
celnuk 1 year ago
@celnuk: Ah, from theoretical to practical assessments; brilliant summary there of the situation with the EU, totally accurate, or at least in total accord with how I see what's going on.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
You're operating from an ideologically pure position. There's no absolute ideological line line that need be crossed for a socialist system to operate in practice while a capitalist class above it draws from the well. There's nothing stopping a centralised state from turning tax dollars into private profits, look at military expenditures as one of many examples. Collective taxes to provide a service for the popultion can be assigned in many ways, not just through state operated agencies.
celnuk 1 year ago
@celnuk: "Operating from an ideologically pure position..." that's a high compliment; thank you.
You make a very intelligent point; I can't entirely agree, but it's the most interesting idea anyone's raised here.Yes; a Social-Democratic system can operate with a mix of Socialist and Capitalist elements. And indeed, tax can be routed through charitable NGOs to provide services. But... the use of collective military tax funds for private gain *does* cross an ideological line.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
it's neither..
MrMrPWN 1 year ago
@MrMrPWN: Both and neither. It's almost certainly been covered in the comments already, but a thinktank called the Frankfurt School attempted to "marry" Communism and Fascism, the idea being that Fascism's alleged strengths could "patch" Communism's perceived weaknesses. The result was the schizophrenic ideology Communitarianism, which is more commonly known as "The Third Way", and is the ideological basis of the EU.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
there was never a difference between the both, and of corse: the eu is a catholic project, therefore it is fascistic.
zer77o 1 year ago
@zer77o: Communism and Fascism are directly opposed; Fascism is an ideology based upon total loyalty to the leader and the nation (e.g. charisma + racism), while Communism is predicated on the needs of the many outweighing the greed of the few. The confusion arises from Hitler's appropriation of the term "socialist" and the totalitarian nature of both systems. They are NOT the same, whatever propaganda you might have been reading.
The EU is a Catholic project... um, proof? Evidence? Anything?
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
do a study on who is who in fas...m - they all were catholics
read the book by karl heinz deschner called "criminal history of christendom" (kriminalgeschichte des christentums)
and do a study on the pope josef ratzinger
and when you are finished with that do a study about the EU
you will come to the conclusion that the EU is in fact a fas....ic project
i cannot explain this further because, you know: surveillance, spying on peoples political attitudes....
zer77o 1 year ago
@zer77o: Oh, I'm well aware of the fascist roots of the EU; that's what the video is about, after all. And it's pretty much common knowledge that Ratzinger is a Nazi and so on.
But it's one thing to call the Catholic church and the EU fascist organisations, and quite another to equate them as one entity; linked, certainly, but the point I questioned was the description of the EU as a *Catholic* plot. See the distinction?
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@zer77o: Re Catholicism being Fascistic... I'm still far from convinced that the EU is a Catholic project, but historically, Catholicism and Fascism *do* owe their origins to the same source; the Roman Empire.
That's incidentally more evidence that the Nazis weren't Socialists by any stretch; according to their own beliefs, the Nazis were the Third Reich, Weimar Germany was the Second Reich, the Roman Empire was the First Reich.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Neither
EuroDivision 1 year ago
Neither
andyisapro 1 year ago
@andyisapro: Both.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
Communism is socialism hijacked by Fascists
pogmotho1n 1 year ago
@pogmotho1n: No it's not. Socialism is non-revolutionary Communism. Socialism seeks to reform the existing system into a more equitable format; Communism seeks to smash the existing system and replace it outright. This presupposes a situation equivalent to martial law while the country's infrastructure is rebuilt following the revolution; temporary totalitarianism by necessity, as opposed to Fascism, which sees totalitarianism as the desired end result.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
They say they used ventilators( I haven't seen any), well where did they blow the gas without the gas endangering anybody in the surrounding camp.
How many people ( or movies ) say something is THE TRUTH, just because , doesn't impress me.
Dont just call me A DENIER or an antisemite, show me the evidence instead.
I remember Al Gore called anyone not believing his CO2 myth a DENIER also, without ever debating "the evidence" with anyone.
kroikye 1 year ago
I think that "An Inconvenient Truth" and the Holocaust have one thing in common, in that they both reveal something so horrible that people shy away from accepting it.
That's not to say Al Gore's film presents the case accurately; he's probably done more harm than good to Environmentalism. The whole "Carbon Footprint" thing is baloney, but the reality of pollution and environmental damage should be evident by common sense.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
The Enigma code was in the hands of the british sinc 42 or 43, none of the transcripts show the germans even mentioning the Mass-gassing of jews.
The Germans weren't aware their code had been broken, they wouldnt mention such a gigantic operation once ?
I begann doubting the official story when seeing vids here on YT of people visiting Treblinka and Auschwitz.
The supposed gaschaimbers looked Extremely UN-airtight, and showed no system of removing the gas safely afterwards.
kroikye 1 year ago
Evidently, the Nazis didn't mention the Final Solution in their coded messages; why would they? The Enigma code was for military information, the Holocaust was internal, orchestrated by letters and telephone. Plus, it was being kept secret from the German people themselves; even those who suspected would not have known for sure, and most would have been too afraid to admit their thoughts. Read "Fatherland" by Robert Harris; fascinating novel.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
Oligargie is the word you are looking for I believe
kroikye 1 year ago
Communism and Fascism are both forms of socialism.
and you don't need to find a link to Moscow, just to Marx and Engles, the authors of the Communist manifesto. Both Germans.
Hitler was heavily influenced by both Marx and Engels.
So are most of the EU leaders.
trwsandford 2 years ago
@trwsandford: Fascism is not a form of Socialism. The Nazi's styled themselves 'National Socialist' to attract the support both Left- and Right-Wing Germans. Nazi's is a form of Fascism; Socialism is at the opposite end of the Political scale.
Marx and Engles being German no more makes then Nazi's than it does make make socialism Fascist; they are not the same thing.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
EU SUCKS it cares more to immigrants than citizens
Lenangreal 2 years ago 5
That's just the tip of the iceberg, mate. But as of January 1st, the EU is in charge. Time to start practicing our goose-step.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
@Lenangreal immigrants ARE citizens once they arrive in your country dipshit, if they're smarter than you they deserve YOUR job, if you don't like it suck it up and learn in school.
cr4yv3n 5 months ago
@cr4yv3n so i hope you get invaded by turks and islamists
Lenangreal 5 months ago
@Lenangreal we already have you inbred twat. That's why you morons could develop, because we fought the turks for over 4 centuries. Oh wait i forgot ...history is not your strong point.
cr4yv3n 5 months ago
@cr4yv3n oh great. so i suppose you agree with me: no immigrants in europe
Lenangreal 5 months ago
@Lenangreal No i don't. I am all for immigrants taking your job if you're stupid enough.
If they have better training, better education why NOT take your job?
This is all about jobs, nothing more.
There is no "national pride" it's just fear their taking the jobs from you. And they are. Lol.
Good for them.
cr4yv3n 5 months ago
@cr4yv3n i already have a job so i dont care. i care about theyre twisted religion and retarded third world culture.
Lenangreal 5 months ago
@Lenangreal *their
Lenangreal 5 months ago
@Lenangreal Coming from a guy whose country just let in the EU a TON of Lybia ( islamic ) refugees this couldn't be more hilarious. xD
cr4yv3n 5 months ago
@cr4yv3n i do not speak for my retarded government. if you dont know the difference, thas your problem. i suppose most romanians dont like the idea of being invaded like most italians do. do romanians like gipsies?
Lenangreal 5 months ago
@Lenangreal "Do romanians like gipsies?" is a difficult question.
It may mean : do you enjoy the company of gipsies who are ugly, dirty , smell and their behavior is less than civilized? In that case: No i don't.
But guess what my former french teacher back when i was 7 was a gipsy, he had left from home and worked part-time for the local store to pay for his education and now he was happily married, with a daughter, a house and a well respected job.
So..yeah i enjoy the company of SUCH gipsies.
cr4yv3n 5 months ago
@cr4yv3n well thats a good point. like you, i preferd civilized people than savages. i have nothing against romanians. Ive got a romanian hard working family as neighbour, and i had a romanian girlfriend. unfortunately as you know, many romanians come in italy to steal and eventually, rape. Well, i really hate those people but i dont hate all romanians, certainly not. I know theyre a minority.
I would like romania to join schengen but other europeans countries put a veto.
Lenangreal 5 months ago
@Lenangreal I'd like our country to stay out of schengen - at least until this minority of troublemakers gets smaller. I'm getting tired of having to explain we don't eat swans for breakfast :S
Some romanians are not yet ready for the world outside their borders.
cr4yv3n 5 months ago
@cr4yv3n is that a good choice? maybe. maybe it prevented thousands of gipsies to flee into western europe. and i bet theyre not so civilized like your teacher.
i dont want them, neither i want refugees. and guess what, switzerland and austria think the same
Lenangreal 5 months ago
What you saw in Italy were the leeches that came begging and stealing not those who wanted to "work" and "live" there - and ofc you formed a ( negative ) opinnion of them.
However their ethnic background is irrelevant, here in Belgium ( where i live now ) i have met plenty of muslims and at first was paranoid : "omg terrorists !!!" due to media branwashing but they are quite nice folk and quite civilized.
Some are even my neighbours - some are friendlier than my own countrymen ! :P
cr4yv3n 5 months ago
Bottm line is you cannot change the system - So utilise it to your advantage we have short life spans so be happy with your family and friends. Enjoy life
prodigy320 2 years ago
What was before The System, and what will be after it? Life is change.
But you're half right; you cannot change the system, I cannot change the systems... but WE (that is, the people) can change it. Its the workers who actually run the system, who feed, maintain and police it, the workers who are oppressed by it, and the workers who believe "There's no changing it." Who tells us so? The people who own the system; the Rich tell us there's no changing it, but then, its them who profit off it.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
You know I was talking to a lot of people friends from different faiths ..I was quite intrigued by one friend of mine who happened to be Muslim he was talking about the disease of Capitalism and how they abhor anything to do with *interest money transactions*..and how it's categorically forbidden for them to deal in interest at any cost..At first I couldnt see where he was coming from but now if you look around the whole world is controlled through interest rates.
SDSen 2 years ago
Right; money is no longer based on wealth, but on debt. The economy now runs on debt; the "incentive to work" that someone else mentioned in a comment is no longer self-betterment, but simply servicing debts. The destination of society, if we keep going this way, is techno-feudalism; the net value of anyone's wage will be zero and the term "wage-slave" literally true. Where debt = wealth, you own nothing; its all on lease from the bank.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
@SDSen What do you of sex education is schools?
VeerGill 1 year ago
@VeerGill Infiltrating sex into the "system" ie schools, tv guarantees submission and dumbing down of herd, In a Democracy control is taken by lies & propaganda.
SDSen 1 year ago
@SDSen: Interesting response... yes, all that happens, but it's primarily because "sex sells"; there's big money in sex, but the eventual knock-on effect is of a sexualised but desensitized society. You've also got to consider the impact of war on human sexuality; the current sexual behavior in Western society is uncannily similar to sexual behavior in time of war, but we're not facing the wartime reduction of the male population.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@VeerGill: Well, the absolutist answer from either hand is a bad answer. Banning sex education only promotes VD and unwanted pregnancy, and encourages folk to get their sex-ed from porn, but teaching kids about sex younger and younger only prompts them to try it sooner, which has exactly the same results as banning sex-ed outright. 14 year-olds need sex-ed; 7 year-olds don't.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge @JCLeSinge ..I don't think unwanted pregnancy would somehow decline if it's taught in schools! ..I feel myself this whole sex thing is a way to corrupt and fill the young human brain with sleaze in the name of 'education'After watching a program about the type of sex education being taught inschools to 14-15 yr olds.My parents great grandparents and their cousins etc didnt need to be educated about these things and i'm sure neither did urs.These things are inbuilt and come naturally.
VeerGill 1 year ago
@VeerGill: Depends on your general view of sex; it's not inherently sleazy, and the perception that it is just encourages people to emulate porn in their sex-lives (IMFAO).
Again, the absolutist thing; teaching sex-ed to teenagers won't increase underage pregnancy, quite the opposite, but teaching it to little kids, e.g. 7-12 year-olds, will; informing them about sex will only encourage them to start way too early, before they can understand contraception or why it's necessary.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
It ignores the human element and by it's very nature of putting a tremendous amount of power in a few hands is terrible and corrupt, history has shown this over and over again-Cultural Revolution in China, Stalin Purges, Pol Pot, etc..etc..
Capitalism does have it's problems but it also encourages discoveries & advances
prodigy320 2 years ago
Capitalism's problems include a perpetual addiction to war, wholesale destruction of the environment and gross exploitation of every working person alive... AND it focuses massive power in the hands of an elite few. You don't think you live in a democracy do you? Really?! Voting in your leaders isn't democracy; its "elective dictatorship"; we choose our dictators in a rigged popularity contest. Democracy would be where our "leaders" understood that they exist to serve us, the people.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Whereas I think inheritance taxes should be eliminated completely, I would say that the 'wealthy' should pay for their share of consumption via VAT/Sales tax. I don't believe they do currently. Generally wage earners foot a disproportionate amount of the bill for funding the infrastructure and social services
SDSen 2 years ago
Question for you! How does a tax on corporate income have anything to do with what an individual pays in taxes?
regardless of what corporate tax rates are, because they (the rich) take full advantage of paying themselves in ways only subject to capital gains tax and not payroll tax, which is significantly higher.
VeerGill 2 years ago
VeerGill - That is exactly why capital gains is taxed lower than income tax. A corporation is not some anonymous, faceless entity but simply an accounting quirk. Because the ownership structure of a business is a Corporation and not a partnership/MLP changes nothing. The argument that corporations are not humans is old and has roots in the British common law, but monetarily they are the same and ought to be treated the same. Don't punish the productive and reward the unproductive
SDSen 2 years ago
The intention of the lowered capital gains tax is/was to encourage corporations to reinvest in their operations (technology,salaried staff,etc.), not to be redistributed to their owners/shareholders for personal gain.
VeerGill 2 years ago
Not true, capital gains and qualified dividend taxes were lowered because of double taxation. Just so you know, there was never a tax on re-invested dividends, so the cut was never really to encourage re-investment. Just a ploy by the supply siders to push their own agenda. If the government wished to increase reinvestment then they should cut the corporate tax rates.
SDSen 2 years ago
I've been told that in Monaco they have no individual taxation, only corporate; people pay tax on their profits, but not on their earnings. The country has the lowest poverty rates, a good lifestyle available to the vast majority, and some of the highest private investment in the world.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
*middle class*
SDSen 2 years ago
Capitalism is a great tool to use for good. However the system can force the money making it back into society via things lik the US inheritance tax
VeerGill 2 years ago
Inheritance tax is a great way to dilute the wealth of the middle. Don't fool yourself into thinking otherwise.
SDSen 2 years ago
I don't believe in Slavery sure but today the woman is making her body a property which somebody has to pay for like a commodity and this could never happen were there not stupid so called feminists since 1968.
EUImperator 2 years ago
This is true; women are being encouraged to treat their bodies like a commodity... but that too is a form of slavery, and far divorced from any real notion of gender equality. The basic principle that men and women are legally, intellectually and morally equal is a tenet of Communist ideology; its not irrational. Extremist feminism and capitalist "girl power" are destructive within society; the notion that women have rights is rational and moral.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
I think it is coming from Jewish Zionists and not even from Communists. See Israel inside were Woman has a long tradition to rule the man which I strongly reject. Because all this nonsense is based on disrespect of biological needs of man versus woman. However did you know that the Central Banking System which is cause of all fascistic problems today was first introduced as an idea at the Communistic Manifest? Watch the Movie "The Obama Deception", and "Endgame", I am back to you then.
EUImperator 2 years ago
In this regard I would like to bring to your attention the
Film: "Firewall - In defense of the Nation State" which you can easily find on Google Video. Mind that the aim is to sink the living standard and divide the society. Mr. Rockefeller onces said that he was for Feminism because he likes Woman to work because by then their is more Taxpayers working for him which is what he celebrates.
EUImperator 2 years ago
If I am right you mean that the so thought slavery you mean is because of Economic Pressure which you insist forces woman into prostitution? But myself I think you must see the real cause of all this problems. Woman in todays World are forced to be chained at their working places instead of being allowed to become a happy mother having a man who brings money home for family and you must question the system which does not allow man to feed their families with one income....
EUImperator 2 years ago
Its intentions are Social Democrat.
ViriathusVingathor 2 years ago
But what does that mean? Is it democracy?
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Addendum from Ostarrichi:
Some part of these above explanations are an abstract from a conversion I had in the past with a well informed source within the United States which helped me a lot to clear my knowledge.
Thanks to him!
EUImperator 2 years ago
The relevant fact of imperial rule in all ancient
through modern European history has been rooted in the
monetarist operations centered in the group of municipal
treasuries associated with the Delphi cult.
EUImperator 2 years ago
Basically:
It was that British empire crafted in the likeness of
the intention of Paolo Sarpi which created capitalism and
its twin, Communism, and which organized anti-
Communism as the Synarchism which served as the
rivalries employed to ignite two so-called "World Wars."
One should not be so credulous as to believe what has
become the conventional myth of and opposition of the
British empire and its admirers to either communism or
fascism.
EUImperator 2 years ago
It has been the custom of Britain, since the beginning of the
Eighteenth Century's so-called "Seven Years War," to play
Russian governments successfully, most of the time, except when wiser heads in Russia were allied with the U.S.A., to contribute to London's success in inducting the leading nations of continental Europe to destroy one another all for the greater glory of the Anglo-Dutch descendants of the empiricist system of empire launched by the influence of Paolo Sarpi.
EUImperator 2 years ago
The are the same as such:
Both believe in an Empire and both believe in force. Both deny the importance of a Nation State. Both incline to forced collectivization. Both deny personal freedom. Both believe in the bad of human character.
Max Horkheimer and Hanna Arendt were Jews by origin but Nazi by inclination. I believe Nazi-Communism is lead by Jews designed in order to create a Strategy of Tensions which is Made in London in order to ruin Europe-Russia real developments as they ever did.
EUImperator 2 years ago
The EU is both, an amalgamated version of Nazi-Communism whereabout both negative elements have merged. High Financial Circles have done business with both in history: With the Communists and with the Nazis. They both like fascism and hate a free society.
Communism or fascism.
In the sense that both Marxism and fascism are by-products
of the doctrines attributed by the British to Adam Smith,
both are, like the British system itself, products of British
ideology of fasicsm.
EUImperator 2 years ago
"The EU is both, an amalgamated version of Nazi-Communism whereabout both negative elements have merged."
That far in, yes, you're absolutely right; that's the influence of the Frankfurt School, tyring to amalgamate Communism and Fascism.
But the conclusion that the two are therefore the same... no, Communism and Fascism are inimical opposites. To attribute it all to British perspectives and influence also is to dismiss 90% of the history and information available.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
on June 4th British people will vote to DESTROY the excrement of nu labour
we in the UK are DISGUSTED by the FRAUD and CORRUPTION of nu labour MPs
thank God nu labour will be DESTROYED and will NEVER come back
the same FRAUD and CORRUPTION is happening on a MUCH WIDER scale in the eu and MILLIONS of UK taxpayers MONEY is given to CORRUPT FOREIGN politicians
we will END this FILTH by taking the UK OUT OUT OUT of the SEWER that is the eu
WeAreTheBrits 2 years ago
EU is ffar from communist,closer to Corporate Socialist.
Dudtz 2 years ago
Thank you; nice to get a comment from someone who knows what they're talking about. As yet, I can't say I've heard an intelligent argument as to why the EU could be considered Communist. I've heard some good ones as to why 'Totalitarian' is more applicable than 'Nazi'. I've also had quite a lot of verbal (see the board), and been called a Nazi more than once, ironically by at least one bona-fide Holocaust denier.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Has it really moved twords Workers and Pesants controlling production?
Has it moved twords lack of a wage gap,
Has it moved twords society not being classed based?
Dudtz 2 years ago
In a word, no. Thanks again; people get so worked up over Stalin that they forget about the ideas and the millions of people who fought for them. Notions like racial and sexual equality, a classless society, the elimination of poverty, an end to war. All that hippy stuff that's in no way profitable.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Profitable?
What do you mean by that?
Dudtz 2 years ago
I mean that inequality, war and poverty are the cornerstones of the Capitalist system and that its supporters will fight to the death and beyond to defend the principles of greed and exploitation that prevent the emergence of a fully-functional and sane society.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Oh.
Dudtz 2 years ago
The ONLY reason Communism gets a bad press is that it espouses a basic principle of disenfranchising of the rich. That means taking away the vast fortunes of the multi-millionaires and their obscene lifestyles. That doesn't mean taking cars, Coca-Cola and TVs away from ordinary people; it means liberating all that excess wealth from the hands of the very few for distribution to the many. Communism is the fight of Poor vs Rich, and the rich (owning the media) have cast the Poor as the bad guy.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
It isn't anti-rich,it is anti-exploitation.
Dudtz 2 years ago
The rich exist only by exploitation. The wealth and resources needed to relieve poverty have to come from somewhere; Communism proposes that we take those resources from the top 10% of the rich, who stole it from the poor anyway through exploitation. Think of a one-class society, with a middle-class lifestyle for all founded on working-class values. The only way you can have that is to remove the rich upper class who currently and historically exploit the collective wealth and resources.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
There can be honest rich,like if people decided to donate money to somone,to make them rich,
Dudtz 2 years ago
Too simplistic; there is no motive within Capitalism for charitable action. Even modern charities have to function as businesses, turning a profit by exploiting the situation; look at Oxfam.
Also, I'm not talking about the 'moderately rich' here, the upper-middle classes; I'm talking about the Rich, the people who own helicopters and private jets. Them. they hog 90% of the world's assets and they are a CLASS of people, not a handful of individual oligarchs.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Yeah,even what many would consider to be very rich,fell they are being exploited.
Dudtz 2 years ago
Hell yeah; by the standard I'm talking, Bruce Willis and all his Hollywood pals would have nothing to fear; the kind of people I'm talking about run companies with a GDP exceeding that of European nations; Lord Sainsbury or Mr Walmart, for example. These people, considered against their wealth, are superfluous, and there are too many of 'em. Any international crisis you can name (environment, economy, etc) could be solved by liberating the resources of a handful of the Super-Rich.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Oh.
Dudtz 2 years ago
It strikes me that you're better informed about Communism than many, but still a bit naive about the nature of capitalism, if you'll forgive me for saying so.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Naive about captitalism,no.
Dudtz 2 years ago
I didn't say you liked Capitalism; just that the full depths and implications of its ideology might in some regard have passed you by. Just that you said it needn't be exploitative or that the rich might willingly give up their wealth; Naivity in so far as wishful thinking.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
You ass,I did not say it was not exploitative.
I was stating that not all rich are exploitaters.
Dudtz 2 years ago
Insulting me does nothing to bolster your argument. Go on then; name me one rich man who can be demonstrated as a true philanthropist. To fit your definition, he would have to have never employed anyone else (exploitation of others), never made any investments (exploitation by usury) and never sold his own labour for a wage (exploitation of self). The insidious nature of Capitalism means that people these days don't grasp the extent of the exploitation going on, or indeed what the word means.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Somone who won a lottery.
Dudtz 2 years ago
The lottery is funded by exploiting the poor with the belief that they can win big; half the money goes into the pot, the other half goes into the lottery operator's pocket; so he gets half a dozen jackpots every week. Exploitation, again, this time based on the simple principle that its easier to scam one million poor people out of $1 that it is to scam $1,000,000 out of one rich man. Lotteries benefit no one except those already rich.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
The point is not that there are rich folkwho donate to charity (even allowing for some genuine philanthropy, the main motive is that wealth is ill-gotten and they must be SEEN to give something back to the people they exploited to become rich).
The point is that there is no rich man under capitalism who did not exploit others to gain his wealth... unless you can prove otherwise by giving me a NAME.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
The EU is neither Communist nor Facist, idiot. You can't judge the EU by an ideology because it isn't fully developed yet.
opalen903 2 years ago
Non-sequiter, friend; "It does not follow..." that being 'undeveloped' (after over 30yrs development to reach this point), prevents us from observing the ideology at play. Do people not know what 'ideology' means? The ideology of the EU is Neo-Liberal; I raise the question whether its origins are Communist or Fascist since people have been comparing the EU to the USSR and bleating about Communism.
JCLeSinge 2 years ago
Most 'common men' won't remember Communism in the ideological way you're alluding to, they will remember it historically.Most 'common men' have only one ideal and that's freedom. Ipso-facto.
herculese220 3 years ago
No, most common men have only ideal and that's slavery. Think about it; we're spoon-fed conformity from the moment we're born. The purpose of school is not education but training; you learn nothing useful except how to sit patiently at a desk doing pointless paperwork. Guess what adult life is about? To be successful is to be a good drone; wage slavery, from cradle to grave, so endemic now that I doubt either you or I could define what 'Freedom' actually means.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
"Being Free from Debt" isn't freedom; that's the first definition I thought of, and it just underlines the nature of the problem: we relate 'Free' to a monetary value, to ownership, immediately, because under Capitalism something is 'Free' is it has yet to be bought or stolen and put under ownership. That's not Freedom, that's Communitarianism at work, juxtaposing concepts and lies as strategy without morality, disarming us of the vocabulary to even think freely.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
No, we may be born into slavery, but it's not our ideology. Freedom to most means being self-sufficient in the vital commodoties needed to sustain life.
herculese220 3 years ago
Something we've never known and would probably be utterly terrifying; what you're envisaging is some kind of impossible Anarcho-Capitalist utopia, which is pretty much what we're heading for. The other option is an enforced return to rural homesteading, which was how Pol Pot got so infamous; doesn't work.
What you're saying about Communism, that the ideology was designed with a covert purpose, is far more true of Neo-Liberalism and Capitalism.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
I mean 'the other option' within the definition of freedom you gave, not that the only way to save society is to march a few million people to death, just to be clear.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
My tip is don't believe history as it is in general education, history is given to us by those that rule and enslave. Here's a good book-list : Tragedy and Hope-Carrol Quigley, The Anglo American Establishment-Carrol Quigley, The Cultural Cold war-Frances Saunders, Between Two Ages-Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Hideden Persuaders-Vance Packard, The Scientific Outlook-Bertrand Russel, The Next Million Years-Charles Galton Darwin, The History Of The World part 1&2-H.G Wells (non-fiction)
herculese220 3 years ago
"My tip is don't believe history as it is in general education, history is given to us by those that rule and enslave."
Good advice.
My information on this particular subject does not come from those sources; I've had access to primary historical references (original WWII photos and correspondence) and a library of rare political books.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
Did you know that in 1953 Senator Norman Dodd headed the Reece investigatory commission, and it found that the Tax-exempt foundations(Ford, Rockefeller,Carnegie, Rhodes), were funding and propping up the Communist regime. With the eventual aim of joining the two. Most of their grain was imported from the US and Canada. The Soviets were broke, but the west needed the cold-war, because wars give governments purpose and control. It's also why they destroyed McCarthey in the media, he was closing in
herculese220 3 years ago
I was right with you there until you tried to rehab McCarthy. sorry, can't be done'; the man led a witch-hunt, there's no it around to say he was the victim. I oculd make a good case to rehab Benedict Arnold, but no one would listen.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
I'm not trying to rehab McCarthy and agree, that he led a witch-hunt, but why do you think that would bother the corrupt US government. It didn't bother them at all. The reason the media and Hollywood brought him down was because some very big powers were getting twitchy.
herculese220 3 years ago
Well that's just politics; McCarthy had support until he went too far. Just a shame 'too far' wasn't a hell of a lot nearer.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
The point you seem to miss, is that Communism was a big experiment and the idea, was to eventually merge it with the west. The communist manifesto was wtitten in London when Marx was in protection.Gorbachev moved to america heads a green movement and wins nobel peace prize. After the fall of the USSR, Gorbachev said to the Eastern bloc leaders, 'you will here it is the end of communism, but don't worry it's just evolving to the next stage. From an interview in the Toronto Star.
herculese220 3 years ago
You're very well informed, but unfortunately you lack a real understanding of what Communism is about. That's not surprising; very few people understand it. All the stuff you're raising is window-dressing, superfluous to the real ideological issues.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
Words like superfluous and ideological, don't really portray your understanding of communism. Summary of ideology (for this little comment box). FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITIES, TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS{socialism}. FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITY, TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS NEEDS {communism}
herculese220 3 years ago
Niet, Comrade, I think you mean:
FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS DUTY, TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS GREED (Capitalism)
FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITY, TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS NEEDS (Communism)
Thanks; I'd forgotten that one.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
I never mentioned Capitalism.......do I sense a socialist? Haha.
herculese220 3 years ago
Lol. Socialism leads to Communism, and then on to Anarchy. By which I mean a 'stateless-state' wherein there is no role for government. You might say that the most important job of a Communist Dictator is to resign. That's the aim of Communism, which tallies exactly with the ideals of the US Founding Fathers; George Washington spoke at length on the need to educate and better every citizen until government was redundant.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
I still think that you miss the fact that all the ideologies we're debating we're in fact facades. They were written by a powerful minority promising nirvana and utopia on earth but with a very different agenda in mind. They were, and are true-believers in the Hegelian-dialect...you have a thesis and an antithesis and then present the solution to the problem. Divide and conquer. Conflict creates change.
herculese220 3 years ago
What you're talking about here is Communitarianism, which is a neo-liberal bastardization of multiple ideologies. 99% of people have never heard of it, but it is the dominant ideology of the modern era. Among the basic principles of Communitarianism AKA 'The Third Way' is the notion that all ideology is false, everyone is corrupt, and that contradictory morals and beliefs can be entertained together.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
Yes I'm up to date on Communitarianism, Brian Gerrish puts it across quite well.
herculese220 3 years ago
Good stuff; most people have never heard of it, despite it being the ideology of Blair, Brown, Thatcher and Reagan, besides having infiltrated medicine, social services, and policing long before 'Common Purpose' appeared. The EU is Communitarian, which is a Neo-Liberal ideology. There are historical links to Left Wing theory through the Frankfurt School, but Neo-Liberalism and Communism are poles apart. Unfortunately, we've all been raised on Neo-Liberalism, e.g. Raised on Communitarian lies.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
Have you ever read Aldous Huxley's - Brave New World?
herculese220 3 years ago
No, actually, but I probably should.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
The 'point' you think I'm missing is that we've been taught to think that no one really believes in their ideals. That's deeply disingenuous to the millions of Communists and Socialists who fought and died for their cause; corruption of the leadership does nothing to detract from the ideals and zeal of the grass-roots reformers and revolutionaries who were the core of Communism and represent what the movement was really about; the rights of the common man.
JCLeSinge 3 years ago
You're still lost in the dialect. The only thing the 'common man' was fighting for was to put food on the table to feed his family.
herculese220 3 years ago